Biblical Mary!

[Niatero]

Unfortunately, they don't really do a good job at clearly explaining exactly how this works, which led to multiple schools of thought in the early church and great disputes, all coming to a head at Nicea.

Exactly. I'll respond to the rest of your post later.

 

[YoursTrue]

There is a difference between thinking something is probable, and believing it is a fact. I hope I have sufficiently clarified.

That reminds me of the account when there was a rebellion against Moses, do you remember that account?

 

[Niatero]

The discussion about the earliest Christians worshipping Jesus looks like too much work for me. I was curious about what you would think about it, but my curiosity is satisfied. If it's okay with you, I'd like to skip over that.

I do see some evidence of this in the gospel of John. But I don't think its origins are Jesus.

Do you mean that you think that Jesus didn't really have those supernatural powers, and didn't claim to have that much power and authority over human lives? That's something we could discuss, but for now I'm not talking about what powers and authority the real Jesus had. I'm talking about his powers and authority in the stories.

Now I'll tell you a story that I made up about a spiritual teacher who taught in and between Galilee and Judea near the end of the second temple period. Not a historical Jesus, and not the Jesus of any Christians including whoever wrote the gospels. I'll call him "the teacher." In my story, the teacher says that he is the ruler of a kingdom that is not of this world, which I'm picturing as a virtual kingdom of people learning together to live together the way he says to live. He says that people enter that kingdom when they recognize and accept him as its ruler, as a person to serve and obeying him above all others. He uses analogies and parables to teach about his kingdom.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

That reminds me of the account when there was a rebellion against Moses, do you remember that account?

Of course. But it has absolutely no relationship to the conversation.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

The discussion about the earliest Christians worshipping Jesus looks like too much work for me. I was curious about what you would think about it, but my curiosity is satisfied. If it's okay with you, I'd like to skip over that.

No problem.

Do you mean that you think that Jesus didn't really have those supernatural powers, and didn't claim to have that much power and authority over human lives? That's something we could discuss, but for now I'm not talking about what powers and authority the real Jesus had. I'm talking about his powers and authority in the stories.

In the stories? Certainly in the tales he does all sorts of miracles. Fed 5000, healed the blind, raised the dead, told the future... He certainly claimed to be the messiah, and John dubbed him Logos and said, "and the Word was God." On one occasion, when Thomas said to him, "My Lord AND MY GOD," he did not object.

Some of this doesn't really imply what many say it implies. Doing miracles in no way indicates a person is either the Messiah or God. Remember that we also have stories of Elijah stopping the rain, multiplying the oil, and bringing a boy back from the dead among other things. These kinds of stories occur outside of Judaism and Christianity as well. Of the Sufi mystic Al Hallaj it is said he "lit four hundred oil lamps in Jerusalem's Church of the Holy Sepulcher with his finger and extinguished an eternal flame in a Zoroastrian fire temple with the tug of a sleeve."

The claims to being the messiah are easily disputed. As to the claims that he is God, what can I say? My only reply is, as I said in my prior posts, NEVER HAPPENED. The idea was inserted into the stories by pagan converts with a world view that the line between men and gods is very thin.

Now I'll tell you a story that I made up about a spiritual teacher who taught in and between Galilee and Judea near the end of the second temple period. Not a historical Jesus, and not the Jesus of any Christians including whoever wrote the gospels. I'll call him "the teacher." In my story, the teacher says that he is the ruler of a kingdom that is not of this world, which I'm picturing as a virtual kingdom of people learning together to live together the way he says to live. He says that people enter that kingdom when they recognize and accept him as its ruler, serving and obeying him above all others. He uses analogies and parables to teach about his kingdom.

Okay?

 

[YoursTrue]

Of course. But it has absolutely no relationship to the conversation.

I think it does. Because opinion and fact obviously can be different.

 

[YoursTrue]

The claims to being the messiah are easily disputed.

Question: how can they be disputed when a person believes the early accounts or prophecies are myths?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I think it does. Because opinion and fact obviously can be different.

The story of the Golden Calf doesn't say squat about the difference between opinion and fact. Please move on.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Question: how can they be disputed when a person believes the early accounts or prophecies are myths?

Whether or not I personally believe in the prophecies is IMMATERIAL. The point here is that the Jewish idea of the Messiah has its origins in the writings of the Prophets, and there are a few instances where he is described just as the messianic era is described. No one, not Jew, not Christian, not Hare Krishna, can claim Jesus is the Jewish messiah unless Jesus meets these criteria. And he doesn't.

I realize you really have a bee in your bonnet about our different approach to scripture. But you really need to knock it of with your hostile jabs. In the future, any passive aggressive posts similar to this one, I'm simply going to ignore. If there are too many such posts, I will simply block you.

 

[YoursTrue]

The story of the Golden Calf doesn't say squat about the difference between opinion and fact. Please move on.

That's your opinion. It certainly does indicate how quickly those in the wilderness moved to other gods because they got impatient waiting for Moses. But since some believe virtually all of the Hebrew Scriptures is mythical, then there is no point to size up how Jesus did not meet the prophecies, since what was written is mythical. It's like taking two containers with cracks, neither can hold water for very long.

 

[YoursTrue]

Whether or not I personally believe in the prophecies is IMMATERIAL. The point here is that the Jewish idea of the Messiah has its origins in the writings of the Prophets, and there are a few instances where he is described just as the messianic era is described. No one, not Jew, not Christian, not Hare Krishna, can claim Jesus is the Jewish messiah unless Jesus meets these criteria. And he doesn't.

I realize you really have a bee in your bonnet about our different approach to scripture. But you really need to knock it of with your hostile jabs. In the future, any passive aggressive posts similar to this one, I'm simply going to ignore. If there are too many such posts, I will simply block you.

It is important because if a person believes all said to be written about the Jews from Genesis onward is based on myths or fiction, no comparison makes sense insofar as what prophecies a Messiah would fill. At least that's the way it seems to me.

 

[YoursTrue]

Whether or not I personally believe in the prophecies is IMMATERIAL. The point here is that the Jewish idea of the Messiah has its origins in the writings of the Prophets, and there are a few instances where he is described just as the messianic era is described. No one, not Jew, not Christian, not Hare Krishna, can claim Jesus is the Jewish messiah unless Jesus meets these criteria. And he doesn't.

I realize you really have a bee in your bonnet about our different approach to scripture. But you really need to knock it of with your hostile jabs. In the future, any passive aggressive posts similar to this one, I'm simply going to ignore. If there are too many such posts, I will simply block you.

Block me as you like, nevertheless -- it again is not logical to say or believe that Jesus did not fulfill the scriptures in the Hebrew-Aramaic portion pertaining to the messiah if they're mythis or fiction. Thank you though for expressing yourself.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Block me as you like, nevertheless -- it again is not logical to say or believe that Jesus did not fulfill the scriptures in the Hebrew-Aramaic portion pertaining to the messiah if they're mythis or fiction. Thank you though for expressing yourself.

I don't want to block you. I want the passive aggression to stop. How things go is entirely up to you.

 

[YoursTrue]

I don't want to block you. I want the passive aggression to stop. How things go is entirely up to you.

You have your opinions, others have theirs. Perhaps they will never meet.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

You have your opinions, others have theirs. Perhaps they will never meet.

I have never had problems with others having different opinions. This is not about opinions. This is about your low key hostility, your willingness to needle me. BACK OFF.

 

[YoursTrue]

I don't want to block you. I want the passive aggression to stop. How things go is entirely up to you.

I'm being truthful. How would you say I'm passive aggressive if I wonder how someone (Not necessarily talking about anyone in particular here) who does not believe the writings of what is commonly known as the Old Testament can compare it with the Christian scriptures if both are myths? No need to get upset...you don't have to answer, of course. However, I'd love to get an answer, so perhaps I will ask others a similar question. P.S. I will not address this question to you again especially since you are getting so excited about this.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I'm being truthful. How would you say I'm passive aggressive i

Just because you have a thought or feeling or think you are right about something, is not the same thing as it being socially appropriate to say it out loud. What you are doing that is so offensive is that once an argument is over, and the agreement is to simply disagree, to enter into my conversations with others over and over again to reassert your same complaint, and insult my intelligence. NEEDLING.

nee·dle
/ˈnēd(ə)l/
verb
gerund or present participle: needling
2. provoke or annoy (someone) by continual criticism or questioning.



I will no longer respond to you this evening.

 

[Niatero]

… John dubbed him Logos and said, "and the Word was God." On one occasion, when Thomas said to him, "My Lord AND MY GOD," he did not object.

As I said, the construction in the original Greek makes the word “God” a qualifier, which is very different from saying “the Word was God” in English. I don’t think that there’s any controversy about that. There is only a disagreement about what it means, because the word “God” is not used that way anywhere else, so there’s nothing to compare it to. Some scholars interpret it as “the Word was God-like” or “the Word had all the attributes and qualities of God.”

Some of this doesn'treally imply what many say it implies. Doing miracles in no way indicates a person is either the Messiah or God.

I wasn’t thinking that it does. I haven’t come to the part yet about him claiming to be the king that God told David that he would raise up from David’s descendants. I know that isn’t the only meaning of “Messiah,” but I’m thinking that in the gospel stories it’s what Peter and Jesus mean by “the Anointed One, the son of the Living God. I haven’t come to that part yet. Nothing I’ve said is about that. It’s about people’s reasons, in the time of the first Christians, for thinking that they worshipped two gods.

As to the claims that he is God, what can I say?

Nothing I said had anything to do with claims that He is God. Just the opposite. It’s about reasons for people thinking that Christians worshipped two gods.

If you don’t have any comments or questions about my story, we can skip that too. I have an idea about how to explain my theory about early Christians worshipping Jesus. That’s also about people’s reasons for thinking that Christians worshipped two gods. That’s important to keep in mind, to to be able understand what I’m thinking: It’s about people’s reasons, in the time of the first Christians, for thinking that they worshipped two gods.

 

[Niatero]

It is important because if a person believes all said to be written about the Jews from Genesis onward is based on myths or fiction, no comparison makes sense insofar as what prophecies a Messiah would fill. At least that's the way it seems to me.

I didn’t understand what the rebellion against Moses had to do with the difference between facts and opinions, but I think I might understand what you’re trying to say here. There can’t be any meaningful discussion about whether or not Jesus meets the conditions if the conditions are purely fictional. Actually though, I think there can be a meaningful discussion about it, even if they are fictional. Even if people disagree about whether the conditions are fictional or not, there can still be a meaningful discussion about whether or not Jesus satisfies them.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

As I said, the construction in the original Greek makes the word “God” a qualifier, which is very different from saying “the Word was God” in English. I don’t think that there’s any controversy about that. There is only a disagreement about what it means, because the word “God” is not used that way anywhere else, so there’s nothing to compare it to. Some scholars interpret it as “the Word was God-like” or “the Word had all the attributes and qualities of God.”

Well that's way above my paygrade. LOL I don't speak a lick of Koine Greek. It's just not part of my tradition.